News Is Mitt Romney the Right Choice for the GOP in 2024?

[WhoWee]

Bad analogy to health insurance- if car insurance DID cover engine damage, it would be in their interest to cover oil changes.

There are policies that do extend coverage for motor and drive train - failure to change your oil (personal responsibility) voids coverage.

 

[WhoWee]

Yes perhaps so but not from insurance companies please. Let them provide ... insurance.

As an aside, the current trend is to offer Medicare Supplements with a Final Expense (burial coverage) on the same application.

 

[BobG]

There are policies that do extend coverage for motor and drive train - failure to change your oil (personal responsibility) voids coverage.

If the health insurance didn't cover birth control, could failure to purchase birth control on their own void their coverage if they get pregnant? If so, then failure to cover contraceptives would definitely reduce the cost of health insurance.

Facetious, perhaps, but it's really hard to compare health insurance to other types of insurance when health insurance typically covers planned events, such as pregnancy. If it were purely insurance against unplanned sickness, accidents, etc, then I guess many more people would be delaying childbirth one way or another - or doctors/hospitals would raise the rates for covered events even higher to cover the losses they were absorbing when people who can't afford kids have kids anyway.

 

[WhoWee]

If the health insurance didn't cover birth control, could failure to purchase birth control on their own void their coverage if they get pregnant? If so, then failure to cover contraceptives would definitely reduce the cost of health insurance.

Facetious, perhaps, but it's really hard to compare health insurance to other types of insurance when health insurance typically covers planned events, such as pregnancy. If it were purely insurance against unplanned sickness, accidents, etc, then I guess many more people would be delaying childbirth one way or another - or doctors/hospitals would raise the rates for covered events even higher to cover the losses they were absorbing when people who can't afford kids have kids anyway.

Many individual health plans offer maternity as a rider - added on to the basic coverage for additional premium. It's not unusual for the premiums to equal the cost of the event over 24-30 months - basically a set aside.

 

[Alfi]

Many individual health plans offer maternity as a rider - added on to the basic coverage for additional premium. It's not unusual for the premiums to equal the cost of the event over 24-30 months - basically a set aside.

I understand the thought, You can save it or they can save it for you.
... but, can you please plug in some dollar values.
I'm Canadian. I have no idea what my daughter cost me.
Other than regular OHIP payments, I received no bill. ( perhaps a few minor ones .. )
So I'm just curious.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I'm Canadian. I have no idea what my daughter cost me.

My kids were born in Japan. I had health insurance from the Japanese company I worked for, but it did not cover pregnancy and birth unless there were complications. The company paid me a bonus for having the children which covered most of the expense. However, my daughter was born a little after midnight Sunday morning after 17 hours of labor. The hospital charged an additional $1000 for the Sunday delivery.

 

[WhoWee]

I understand the thought, You can save it or they can save it for you.
... but, can you please plug in some dollar values.
I'm Canadian. I have no idea what my daughter cost me.
Other than regular OHIP payments, I received no bill. ( perhaps a few minor ones .. )
So I'm just curious.

Some information from Mass - where Romney put his plan in place.
http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/consumer/physical-health-treatment/quality-cost/data/by-indicator/childbirth/maternity.html

In general, the cost is (strangely-IMO) comparable to a funeral ranging from $3,000 to $10,000. This link estimates $5,000 to $20,000 for a C-section.
http://www.healthinsurance-help.com/maternity-health-insurance.html

The cost ultimately depends upon your location and the medical specifics.

 

[WhoWee]

Today is the big day in MI and AZ. Romney is not happy with the robo-calls attempting to attract Democrats to vote against him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gan-robocalls/2012/02/27/gIQAIbgceR_blog.html

While not the dirtiest trick of all time - IMO - it might strengthen support for Romney with the Republican base.

 

[skeptic2]

Today is the big day in MI and AZ. Romney is not happy with the robo-calls attempting to attract Democrats to vote against him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gan-robocalls/2012/02/27/gIQAIbgceR_blog.html

While not the dirtiest trick of all time - IMO - it might strengthen support for Romney with the Republican base.

If Republicans weren't so cheap as to put Obama's name on the ballot so they could get taxpayer funding, they wouldn't have to worry about crossover voting.

 

[WhoWee]

If Republicans weren't so cheap as to put Obama's name on the ballot so they could get taxpayer funding, they wouldn't have to worry about crossover voting.

Can you please explain/support?

 

[skeptic2]

http://www.livingstondaily.com/article/20120227/OPINION01/202270305/How-will-voters-react-rare-primary-twist-?odyssey=mod|breaking|art7

 

[WhoWee]

http://www.livingstondaily.com/article/20120227/OPINION01/202270305/How-will-voters-react-rare-primary-twist-?odyssey=mod|breaking|art7

How are the Republicans being "cheap"?

 

[WhoWee]

Romney is the projected winner for both Arizona and Michigan.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/28/election/2012/primaries/index.html

"Mitt Romney will win the Michigan primary, CNN projected based on exit polls and partial returns, giving him a sweep of two contests Tuesday vital to his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

Romney also is the winner in Arizona, according to the CNN projections, providing new momentum for the former Massachusetts governor in his bid to be the Republican candidate against President Barack Obama in November.

In Michigan, Romney was ahead with 41% to 37% for Rick Santorum, 12% for Texas Rep. Ron Paul and 7% for Newt Gingrich, with 74% of unofficial returns counted.

The state's 30 delegates will be allocated on a proportional basis, and Romney and Santorum each won three so far, according to the returns. However, it was unclear who would win the most Michigian delegates, which are based on congressional districts.

Romney's victory in Arizona, where exit polls showed him getting 43% to 28% for Santorum, gave Romney all of the state's 29 delegates in the winner-takes-all primary. Trailing well back were Gingrich and Paul."

 

[grendle7]

I know it's a knee-jerk reaction, but Romney sometimes reminds me of a used car salesman who's trying to sell me my own car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4vS9SF3vc-A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[ThomasT]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vS9SF3vc-A

The format you used for posting the video was incorrect. You can see the correct format by replying to this post (ie., hitting the "quote" button).

Anyway, yeah, imho, Romney is the Mittbot, the Ken doll, the wedding cake figurine, the used car salesman. Extremely good looking. He probably could have made a good living in soap operas, but a lot less money.

Acceptable candidate for the presidency? Not imho.

 

[WhoWee]

Anyway, yeah, imho, Romney is the Mittbot, the Ken doll, the wedding cake figurine, the used car salesman. Extremely good looking. He probably could have made a good living in soap operas, but a lot less money.

Romney won the female vote in MI - didn't he?

 

[ThomasT]

Romney won the female vote in MI - didn't he?

Don't know. But I wouldn't doubt it. Apparently, women are somewhat attracted to vacuous, but extremely good looking, male model types of guys who also have about $200M. I can't say that I would be any different if I were a woman.

 

[WhoWee]

Don't know. But I wouldn't doubt it. Apparently, women are somewhat attracted to vacuous, but extremely good looking, male model types of guys who also have about $200M. I can't say that I would be any different if I were a woman.

I don't think women treat it as a beauty contest. However, might it be possible women view him as being more sophisticated and better equipped to deal with heads of state?

 

[ThomasT]

If that were true, I'd expect Romney to be polling about 67%. If anything, I think women are generally more attentive to details and look at the whole package - rather than only the rhetoric or positions - I could be wrong?

Or, you could be right. This is a scary election. But then, aren't they all?

 

[Char. Limit]

I think that deciding that one arbitrary group of people is inherently better or worse at making decisions than another arbitrary, but mutually exclusive group of people is a blanket statement that should be avoided if at all possible.

 

[ThomasT]

I think that deciding that one arbitrary group of people is inherently better or worse at making decisions than another arbitrary, but mutually exclusive, group of people is a blanket statement that should be avoided if at all possible.

Good point, imho.
Back to Romney. My current opinion (it changes a lot, wrt lots of things): I really don't think he would, or could, do any real harm, and he might even get lucky and do something really good (ie., that precipitates some sort of major improvement in America). I think that Romney and Obama are the only candidates worthy of serious consideration. I make fun of Romney, but the bottom line is that he really does have his **** together. I very much doubt that he would make any sort of serious mistake. He's a business as usual guy. Prima facie, he would be an acceptable president. I might actually vote for him ... if I happen to be in experimental mode on election day.

 

[WhoWee]

Good point, imho.
Back to Romney. My current opinion (it changes a lot, wrt lots of things): I really don't think he would, or could, do any real harm, and he might even get lucky and do something really good (ie., that precipitates some sort of major improvement in America). I think that Romney and Obama are the only candidates worthy of serious consideration. I make fun of Romney, but the bottom line is that he really does have his **** together. I very much doubt that he would make any sort of serious mistake. He's a business as usual guy. Prima facie, he would be an acceptable president. I might actually vote for him ... if I happen to be in experimental mode on election day.

The man has a track record of success. He has a mix of executive level experience in business, the Olympics, and as Governor (of a Democrat controlled state). A vote for Romney is quite reasonable.

 

[apeiron]

He's a business as usual guy.

Do presidents get any choice? Wasn't Obama sold as a mould-breaker who went straight into BAU-mode?

But the derivation of BAU is probably quite amusing.

"The maxim of the British people is 'Business as usual'." - Winston Churchill, speaking at Guildhall, 9 November 1914.

Crisis? What crisis?

 

[WhoWee]

Business as usual can have several different meanings. IMO-President Obama owes a major share of his legislative accomplishments to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid - they controlled the House and Senate during his first 2 years.

 

[ThomasT]

Do presidents get any choice?

It depends, I think. For example, the Bush administration wasn't just BAU. It seems that it was extreme, to a fault, and that we'll be paying for it in one way or another, or many ways, for a long time.

I don't see Romney as an extremist. So, it's, imho, a coin toss between him and Obama at this time.

 

[Hobin]

I don't see Romney as an extremist. So, it's, imho, a coin toss between him and Obama at this time.

He may not be an extremist, but the people I know in my country definitely like him less than Obama (especially because of Romney's American exceptionalism). I don't know how it is elsewhere, of course, but diplomatically speaking, Obama would - in my opinion - be a better choice.

 

[russ_watters]

He may not be an extremist, but the people I know in my country definitely like him less than Obama (especially because of Romney's American exceptionalism). I don't know how it is elsewhere, of course, but diplomatically speaking, Obama would - in my opinion - be a better choice.

Do you believe that your criteria for why he would be a better choice would also apply to Americans?

 

[Hobin]

Do you believe that your criteria for why he would be a better choice would also apply to Americans?

That depends. Do these Americans care about how the rest of the world sees them? If they do, and I'm right (which is obviously debatable, considering I can only speak for myself and the people I've talked to), and Romney and Obama would be equally good/bad for America on all other points, then yes.

 

[WhoWee]

That depends. Do these Americans care about how the rest of the world sees them? If they do, and I'm right (which is obviously debatable, considering I can only speak for myself and the people I've talked to), and Romney and Obama would be equally good/bad for America on all other points, then yes.

I would think the world's view of Romney would be favorable - given his success with the Olympics?

 

[lisab]

Do you believe that your criteria for why he would be a better choice would also apply to Americans?

They did in the last election, apparently.

 

[WhoWee]

They did in the last election, apparently.

Romney wasn't a candidate in the last general election.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Romney wasn't a candidate in the last general election.

Perhaps she was referring to the last Presidential election.

 

[WhoWee]

Perhaps she was referring to the last Presidential election.

Romney wasn't on the ballot - (McCain/Palin vs Obama/Biden).

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Romney wasn't on the ballot - (McCain/Palin vs Obama/Biden).

He wasn't the nominee. He was a candidate.

 

[mheslep]

The conservative base may be demanding too much of Romney the candidate for purposes of accomplishing their goals (which I share). It may be that all that is required is a non-obstructionist president, and the popular, respected innovators in Congress (e.g. Rep Ryan) can do the rest. That line of thinking depends on getting the gavel out of Harry Reid's hand in the Senate, but then that is probably a requirement of success in any scenario.

 

[mheslep]

Hobin, if I may:

...Do these Americans care about how the rest of the world sees them? ..

Do you think it important to poll the American viewpoint when assessing PM Rutte? Or, say, UK or French or Russian opinion?

 

[MarcoD]

Do you think it important to poll the American viewpoint when assessing PM Rutte?

Nope. And I disagree with Hobin.

 

[Oltz]

The conservative base may be demanding too much of Romney the candidate for purposes of accomplishing their goals (which I share). It may be that all that is required is a non-obstructionist president, and the popular, respected innovators in Congress (e.g. Rep Ryan) can do the rest. That line of thinking depends on getting the gavel out of Harry Reid's hand in the Senate, but then that is probably a requirement of success in any scenario.

I think I would vote for Rep Ryan if he ran...maybe next time, but I would prefer now.

 

[mheslep]

I think I would vote for Rep Ryan if he ran...maybe next time, but I would prefer now.

Me too. Or Mitch Daniels. Or Marco Rubio. Woulda coulda. My point above is I may be able to get Ryan's works with a Romney presidency.

 

[lisab]

He may not be an extremist, but the people I know in my country definitely like him less than Obama (especially because of Romney's American exceptionalism). I don't know how it is elsewhere, of course, but diplomatically speaking, Obama would - in my opinion - be a better choice.

Do you believe that your criteria for why he would be a better choice would also apply to Americans?

They did in the last election, apparently.

Romney wasn't a candidate in the last general election.

Sorry for the confusion. I thought Russ's comment was about Obama.

 

[AlephZero]

I would think the world's view of Romney would be favorable - given his success with the Olympics?

Oh, please. Until this thread, I didn't even know he had anything to do with the Olympics. Tell me again what medals he won, I've forgotten.

Anyway, whatever he did must have been a failure, considering they are having to rerun the whole games again in London this year ...

 

[AlephZero]

Do you think it important to poll the American viewpoint when assessing PM Rutte? Or, say, UK or French or Russian opinion?

The rest of the world tends to be interested in whether a potential US president actually knows where the rest of the world is. History suggests that isn't a prerequiste for getting the job, and certainly not for applying for it.

 

[mheslep]

It still surprises me how frequently posts are a made on behalf of the thoughts of the entire world.

 

[apeiron]

It still surprises me how frequently posts are a made on behalf of the thoughts of the entire world.

Are you saying the US exercises no power over the rest of the world?

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) is just one current example where people have great sovereignty concerns.

http://tppwatch.org/2012/01/19/beware-the-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement/

So yes, the qualities of future presidents is an issue of interest.

 

[mheslep]

Are you saying ...

Actually I am saying what I said.

 

[apeiron]

Actually I am saying what I said.

So what is your point exactly?

 

[Office_Shredder]

He's saying that people make posts claiming to speak on behalf of the entire planet

 

[apeiron]

He's saying that people make posts claiming to speak on behalf of the entire planet

I'd call that supplying context to balance a personal opinion. But still not sure how that relates to AlephZero's reply then.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I'd call that supplying context to balance a personal opinion. But still not sure how that relates to AlephZero's reply then.

The rest of the world tends to be interested in whether a potential US president actually knows where the rest of the world is.

Alternative hypothesis: a lot of people don't care

 

[MarcoD]

Most people I know don't care about it. Either they don't care, or they'll put a US president into one of the US stereotypes available to them.

The discussions here are interesting to me since I am usually clueless why certain people get elected anywhere. And US politics are pretty singular to the European style.

(They'll follow the news, of course. But it's like watching the weather for tomorrow. Will it be rain or sunshine?)